Thief

The Intel Core i5-12400F and AMD Radeon RX 9060 combination ranks 1586th out of 2851 tested combos in Thief, placing it in the lower-middle tier of the database. This position indicates a system that is fully capable of running the game but does not dominate the leaderboard, with the GPU’s performance profile being the primary constraint at higher resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 1586 out of 2851 places it just past the midpoint of all tested configurations, suggesting a balanced but not exceptional pairing for Thief. This positioning is largely consistent with the individual component percentiles; the CPU sits at the 73rd percentile among all processors, while the GPU is at the 59th percentile among all graphics cards. The gap between these two values is notable—the processor is a stronger component relative to its peers than the graphics card is relative to its own field.

Benchmark data supports this interpretation. The average benchmark score for the CPU is 19039, while the GPU’s average is 16014. In terms of percentile placement, the CPU’s 73rd percentile versus the GPU’s 59th percentile means that in a typical system, the graphics card is more likely to become the limiting factor. The measured frame rates in Thief confirm this dynamic, as the FPS drops are more pronounced when increasing resolution—a classic sign of GPU limitation—while the CPU’s 6 cores and 12 threads provide ample headroom for the game’s stealth-based gameplay.

The nearest rivals for each component further contextualize the combo’s standing. The CPU’s closest competitor is the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS, with a delta of 0 percent, meaning the i5-12400F essentially matches it in average score. The Intel Core 3 201E trails by 0.1 percent, while the Intel Core i5-1335U is ahead by 0.3 percent. For the GPU, the RX 9060 is 0.7 percent behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, 1 percent ahead of both the AMD Radeon R9 370X and the AMD Radeon RX 7700, and 2.1 percent ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W5500. These tight margins indicate that the combo’s rank is not due to any single weak link, but rather a middling overall balance.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture with the Navi 44 chip, fabricated on a 4 nm process by TSMC. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s. The memory runs at an effective speed of 2250 MHz, or 18 Gbps. The GPU has 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units, along with 28 ray tracing cores. Its boost clock reaches 2990 MHz, with a game clock of 2400 MHz and a base clock of 1700 MHz.

In Thief, the GPU’s memory configuration is a critical factor. The 8 GB VRAM capacity is sufficient for the game’s era—Thief released in 2014—but the 128-bit bus width limits memory bandwidth, which becomes more relevant at higher resolutions. The measured FPS data shows that at 4K Ultra, the average drops to 38 FPS, while at 4K Low it rises to 69 FPS. This swing of 31 FPS from Low to Ultra at 4K demonstrates that the GPU’s compute and memory subsystems are being heavily taxed by the game’s higher settings, not the CPU.

The GPU’s raw compute capability, rated at 21.43 TFLOPS for FP32, is more than adequate for a 2014 title, but the game’s engine appears to scale with settings in a way that pressures the memory system. The 64 ROPs and 112 TMUs are likely the bottleneck at Ultra settings, as the pixel fill rate of 191.4 GPixel/s and texture rate of 334.9 GTexel/s are sufficient for lower presets but struggle to maintain high FPS when resolution and detail both increase. The GPU’s benchmark percentile of 59 aligns with this interpretation—it is a mid-range card that performs admirably in most scenarios but lacks the top-tier headroom for maximum settings at 4K.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K clearly identifies the GPU as the limiting component in this combo. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 99 at 1920x1080 to 68 at 2560x1440, a decline of 31 FPS, and then further to 40 at 3840x2160, another drop of 28 FPS. The scaling is roughly linear in absolute terms, but the percentage loss is telling: moving from 1080p to 1440p costs about 31 percent of the frame rate, while moving from 1440p to 4K costs another 41 percent.

At Low settings, the pattern is even more pronounced. The average FPS at 1080p is 171, dropping to 117 at 1440p (a 32 percent reduction), and then to 69 at 4K (a 41 percent reduction). The fact that the frame rate at 4K Low (69 FPS) is higher than the frame rate at 1440p High (68 FPS) suggests that the GPU is sensitive to both resolution and settings, but settings have a larger impact per step than resolution alone.

The Medium settings data provides the most insight into the scaling behavior. At 1080p Medium, the average is 130 FPS with a minimum of 110 and maximum of 149. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 89 FPS with a range of 76 to 102. At 4K Medium, the average is 52 FPS with a range of 45 to 60. This progression shows a consistent drop of roughly 40-42 FPS for each resolution step, which is a hallmark of GPU-bound performance. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the FPS would remain more stable across resolutions, as the processor’s workload does not change with resolution. Instead, the steady decline indicates that the RX 9060’s rendering pipeline is saturated.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the RX 9060 delivers playable frame rates across all settings. Low settings produce an average of 171 FPS, Medium yields 130 FPS with a minimum of 110 FPS, High results in 99 FPS, and Ultra drops to 94 FPS. The gap between Medium and High is 31 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is only 5 FPS, suggesting that the Ultra preset adds minimal visual benefit relative to its performance cost at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance decreases as expected. Low settings average 117 FPS, Medium averages 89 FPS with a range of 76 to 102 FPS, High averages 68 FPS, and Ultra averages 65 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra narrows to just 3 FPS at this resolution, indicating that the Ultra preset is providing diminishing returns. The Medium preset’s minimum of 76 FPS remains above the 60 FPS threshold, making it a viable option for smoother gameplay.

At 3840x2160, the GPU begins to struggle with the higher settings. Low settings still achieve an average of 69 FPS, which is playable, but Medium drops to 52 FPS with a minimum of 45 FPS, High falls to 40 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 38 FPS. The Medium preset’s minimum of 45 FPS is below the ideal 60 FPS target, and the High and Ultra presets are borderline unplayable for smooth action sequences. The scaling from Low to Medium at 4K is a 17 FPS drop, while the drop from Medium to High is 12 FPS, and from High to Ultra is just 2 FPS, confirming that the GPU is running out of headroom at this resolution.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience in Thief, the data suggests prioritizing Medium settings at 1080p and 1440p, with Low settings reserved for 4K. At 1080p Medium, the average of 130 FPS with a minimum of 110 FPS provides a smooth and responsive experience that fully utilizes the monitor’s refresh rate potential. The jump to High reduces the average to 99 FPS, which is still playable, but the 31 FPS cost is not justified by the modest visual improvements in a 2014 title.

At 1440p, the Medium preset is the clear winner. The average of 89 FPS and minimum of 76 FPS keeps gameplay fluid, while the High preset’s 68 FPS average is acceptable but leaves less margin for demanding scenes. The Ultra preset at 65 FPS is nearly indistinguishable from High in performance, offering no reason to select it over Medium.

For 4K, the Low preset is the only setting that maintains an average above 60 FPS, at 69 FPS. Medium at 52 FPS is playable but the minimum of 45 FPS may cause noticeable stutter in busy areas. Given that the game is from 2014 and does not feature current-generation graphics, the visual downgrade from Medium to Low at 4K is likely minimal, making Low the recommended choice for 4K users. The Ultra preset at 38 FPS should be avoided entirely.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Alder Lake architecture, manufactured on Intel’s 10 nm process. It has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, with a TDP of 65 W. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The processor supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, which adds flexibility for system builders.

In Thief, the CPU’s role is secondary to the GPU, but its specifications ensure it does not become a bottleneck. The 6 cores and 12 threads are sufficient for the game’s threading model, which was designed for the multi-core processors of the early 2010s. The boost clock of 4.40 GHz provides strong single-thread performance, as evidenced by the 3DMark single-thread score of 909, which is crucial for the game’s main loop and AI calculations.

The CPU’s benchmark results show a balanced profile. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 12380 and single-core score of 1680 indicate solid performance for a mid-range desktop chip. The Geekbench multicore score of 9472 and single-core score of 1964 reinforce this assessment. In Thief, the measured FPS at 1080p Low of 171 FPS demonstrates that the CPU can feed the GPU with enough frames to reach high frame rates, but the GPU’s limitations become apparent at higher resolutions and settings.

The CPU’s nearest rivals all have average scores within 0.3 percent of the i5-12400F, showing that it is a well-positioned processor in its segment. The AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS matches it exactly, while the Intel Core 3 201E and Intel Core i5-1335U are within a fraction of a percent. This tight grouping means that swapping the CPU for any of these alternatives would have negligible impact on Thief’s performance, further confirming that the GPU is the determining factor in this combo’s results. The CPU’s 73rd percentile ranking among all processors indicates it offers plenty of headroom for this game, and even for more demanding titles, it is unlikely to be the bottleneck.